I was surprised to see Alicia Vikander on the cover of Elle’s September issue because I didn’t realize that she has anything big coming out? Her turn as Lara Croft in the franchise reboot, Tomb Raider, doesn’t come out until next March. She does have Tulip Fever coming out in late August, but I thought people wanted to keep that a secret, because it looked like such a mess? And then there’s Submergence, a film which will be making its way through the film festivals this fall, probably. So, yeah, she does have a reason why she got the September cover, I guess. Sorry, I don’t always keep up with her schedule! Anyway, here are some highlights from her cover profile:
Getting into shape for Tomb Raider: “I love big popcorn movies. I’ve never done action scenes on this level—not even close. It feels like I’m back to dancing—the training, the intensity. You need to be aware of your movement up in the wires and how your body works… [I spent a lot of time] bulking up quite a lot at first and then trying to just, like, tone down. I’ve never been able to lift my own weight, and the day when you have that capacity, it’s pretty empowering! And you get the endorphins afterward.”
She’s ready to be a mother: “I don’t even have children, and it’s the wonder of my world. I’ve always wanted kids. I’ve never been pregnant, but I hope to have a family one day. It’s both the expectation and knowing that it should be the greatest experience of my life—and suddenly from one day to another, it’s a reality; it’s a new chapter of your life.”
She almost gave up on acting: After being rejected from drama school (twice!), Vikander was about to call it quits—that is, until she was cast in Pure. “It’s so strange to say, but I knew that this was my one shot,” she says of the 2010 movie. “It was such a layered role; I knew it would be my one chance to show what I could do.”
Director Derek Cianfrance on Alicia’s effect on Michael Fassbender: “Fassbender has a really hard time doing it bad—know what I mean? Then I had this young upstart in Alicia. I think she threw Michael off his center. What I saw in front of the camera was this incredibly trained actor trying to get his bearings with this thoroughbred who was just inexhaustible. Whereas Michael would get it good in the first two takes, Alicia would be hitting her stride sometimes around the 13th take. It made for a real magic between the two of them, where they were pushing each other… All I can say is that what I saw unfolding in front of my camera felt true to me, and when you’re making a love story, if you don’t believe that the people are falling in love, it’s not really working. I believed it was happening.”
There are more quotes from more directors in that piece, but I felt like ending it there because I thought Derek Cianfrance’s comments were telling and slightly nauseating. Like, Alicia is a “thoroughbred”? It’s gross to refer to her like that in general, and it makes no sense in context either. She’s a thoroughbred because it took her 13-plus takes to act properly? She’s a thoroughbred because Fassbender didn’t know how to act against someone who needed 13 takes to figure out the scene? As for the comments on motherhood… I guess we should make our peace with the idea that there could be a Vikbender baby coming at some point. Who knows?
Photos courtesy of Elle Magazine.
This is a weird interview. I don’t know what to make of it.
The only movie I love her in is Deux which should’ve been her Oscar role.
I think it’s weird too.
Plus the “I’ve never been pregnant line” is odd.
And not cause it’s coming from Vikander, it’s just a huh(?) quote to my mind.
I came here to say the exact same thing. It seems like a very deliberate choice of words.
Yes- why qualify the statement like that? Weird.
That one stood out to me too, she worded it like she’s denying rumors – but there are no rumors of her having had children?
That did sound weird, could it be a translation issue? English is not her first language, maybe she translated it in her head and it came out sounding strange? Or she’s denying a rumor…or starting a rumor. You know the way Halle Berry posed on the red carpet recently, the way she positioned her hands had everyone thinking she’s pregnant. Maybe it’s intentional, pose or phrase something a certain way and everyone starts talking about you…
I didn’t understand the headline too but when I read the sentences preceding that line it makes complete sense. Many women who have never been pregnant think pregnancy and having children is going to be the most wonderful experience ever! They create an entire fantasy of how life will be.
She’s just being honest that: yes she’s never been pregnant or dealt with the experience of raising kids, so it does come across as eye-rollingly naive to predict with *certainty* that it *will* be the greatest experience for her ever! But I come across women who had the same certainty of glamorous motherhood being hit with post-partum depression, colicky kids, or external stressors in life.
“I don’t even have children, and it’s the wonder of my world. I’ve always wanted kids. I’ve never been pregnant, but I hope to have a family one day. It’s both the expectation and knowing that it should be the greatest experience of my life”
It’s always weird when I read quotes without the questions.
Lol. That was the first thought I had and am delighted to see it as the first comment.
A few weeks ago I saw Ex Machina (for the first time) and she was fantastic in it.
Regarding the cover: the darker hair and eye-make does not suit her at all.
That movie was terrible. Just came here to say I agree the eye makeup is bad.
Hah, I disagree. She’s got dark eyes and a more sallow undertone to her skin. When with light hair and make-up she always looks incredibly washed out but here she looks alert and intense.
Thank god I am not an actor because being paired with an actress who needs over a dozen takes instead of just rehersing her performance in advance so she nails it quickly, would make me Christian Bale level of ragey. Aren’t you embarrassed when your acting partner is thrown off because you take forever to do your job?
It always depends. Some directors are those that require so many takes and it is not the actors fault or decision. Alfred Hitchcock would exhaust his actors by always requiring 50 takes and more. Similar today is Guillermo Del Toro. 40 takes are no exception for him. He wants to have everything perfect to what he has in mind. Doesn’t mean the actors are bad.
That has to with the direction of the movie. Alfred Hitchcock was a crazy, sex deviant maniac who treats his actors like crap but his direction of his movies are super. As well as Guillermo del Toro’s direction of his movies are really good. This is why as a actor you should be prepared. In this case of now, this has everything to do with the actress. Alicia should have been prepared for this movie. 13 takes really? I am not spiteful, I am really speaking thoughtfully. Alicia is not a bad actress bit she is a good but “meh” actress. Ex machina was good, her plain Jane performance works really well as robot. All I am saying is Alicia should’ve been prepared.
It’s a different thing when a director pushes the actors to see how many directions a scene can go, no actor should need 13 attempts to start acting.
That’s differen, those directors require a lot of takes because they do a lot of different set ups and coverage. Derek cianfrance hates doing multiple takes, on blue valentine he would only do one or two takes to keep the naturalism he’s going for. The fact that he acknowledges fassbender could get it in two takes as a trained actor is very telling of what he really thinks. If you need 13 takes to get to your first good shot, you’re not worthy of that Oscar.
12 takes really isn’t that many.
yes thank god you aren’t, b/c I mean some directors like to do a ton of takes (david fincher). like every job every boss and co-worker is different and demands different things from you.
She is pretty. Why did someone hate her so much to approve that cover. It is horrible. Her body blends into the background. Unless that was the intent. And if the second picture was suppose to be sexy.. I don’t know. it seems they don’t know how to Brand her yet. What is she.. serious, girl next door, tomboy..
I never understood the white background in fashion, and if you model is wearing a white dress… This editorial is not original for what is supposed to be the biggest month of the year.
Her eyes are looking in two different directions. Lord help!
As for the baby thing…neither of them need to be parents.
She’s probably got a lazy eye. I do two, and sometimes I see it happen when I glance into a mirror
Neither of them need to be parents? That’s not for you to say.
Yeah, I noticed that too. She might have a lazy eye. Both my eyes wonder. There are ways to get a good pic though… This cover isn’t great.
I don’t think it’s a lazy eye situation but more the fact that one eye is significantly smaller than the other. I believe Angie Harmen, another beautiful actress, has the same so called affliction.
Oxycontin bedroom eyes.
Even then, I feel they should’ve used the 2nd photo for the cover, it would be much more interesting. But she still feels bland to me. I did see a video from vogue where she called Swedish random people and asked if they knew Alicia and she came across really well, but she isn’t charismatic at all.
.
I recently lurked into a forum thread about Fassbender after seeing some bizarre bikini photos of Alicia Vikander. His stans are more disappointed at Fassbender being a drug addict more than hating Alicia Vikander. He has no more movies come out after Snowman and hasn’t been in any new projects for one and a half year. He isn’t even filming the latest X-men movie. You guys should check out candid photos of him on Instagram. I bet store owners posted his photos on IG since he got freebies from them. Fassbender has completely lost his looks and looks unkempt and grossly underweight. And it’s very natural for an addict to be with another addict. If you guys look up Vikander’s photos and videos on Getty Images, you can even see some sketchy character (the guy with black backpack) partying with V and F on the yacht.
That is exactly why I was upset with him for. I saw those photos and he looked terrible. I was disappointed at that and he do not have any films coming up.
I’m bored, where can I find that?
Fassbender’s recent photo. Excessive sweating is a sign of some drug withdrawal symptoms.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BW8XQbLn_rm/
Video of Fassbender and Vikader on the yacht:
Some think the man with black backpack is the snowman.
http://www.gettyimages.com/license/813018864
If you look at the caption of the instagram photo, the guy who posted it said Michael was doing boxing training with him. I don’t think the photos or videos show anything damning.
Thanks, Rshee:)
But I’m a bit disappointed because I didn’t see anything sketchy about it. The instagram photo shows him, apparently, after a boxing training session and yes, he is sweaty, but he doesn’t look bad to me, just reddish and sweaty like many people look after vigorous exercise.
The video, well, the guy is sketchy because of his hair? I mean, there’s nothing sketchy to me. If anything, I just find yacht partying lame, to be honest. The whole party vibe I get from it doesn’t reflect well on either of them, but that’s as far I can go with my “evaluation” of the proofs:D
Notice how his trainer was almost dry and he was completely soaked in sweat.
As for the yacht video, some say the man who was wearing backpack is a dealer.
The guy that is with him doesn’t seem to be his trainer, someone from the same gym who recognized him. Even if he was, the trainer doesn’t really sweat as much… I’m sorry, but I feel this is all a bit looney to me.
“As for the yacht video, some say the man who was wearing backpack is a dealer”
Some.. who? His stans? Is there a pattern with this drug dealing thing? First Sophie Hunter,now Vikander LOL
@Miss S Just a bit ? Fassbender has some batshit crazy stans.
I am noticing, she looks tired alllll the time. At first I was thinking it was just bad photos, because she is a beautiful woman, but now I see that is the way she looks in all photos. I wonder if her eyes have a light sensitivity? She just always has half closed lids and redness around her eyes.
They seem like hard partiers. At her age, that’s typical. At his age, its a bit tired and old.
I have light sensitive eyes from recent lasik eye surgery. I really think her eyes are like that from the rumoured issue.
Just me, or does this really reads as though he’s trying to excuse her not being able to get it done in fewer takes? And Fassbender being thrown….well he fancied her obviously so probably that’s why he didn’t lose his rag.
Any other actors celebrating the fact they can’t get it down in a couple of takes?
I’m not sure what he’s trying to say, but I do know that he likes to shoot a lot more than most directors. That’s his style apparently, for the movie in question he shoot more than 209 hours on three months, it’s lot.
Ah that ads a bit more context to how he sees this a positive. A lot of directors wouldn’t but she may have known this about him
Explains exactly why she was rejected for drama school! There is so much potential talent in one room and you only got 1 shot to prove it so the school can separate the potential from the duds. They are very good and knowing what they have in front of them. My friend who was accepted at all 3 drama schools he auditioned for got read like a damn tea leaf by his favourite teacher and it improved his acting skills (he had a need to please).
Vikander seems to be a good actress but many people would be able to somewhat get it right when a director allows that many takes and is probably directing her what to do. Honestly it just shows that Hollywood celebrates anybody with a pretty or interesting face who can express themselves on a basic to good level on a camera and it explains why so many trained English actors find success in Hollywood. You’ve got to have some talent on board at some point. Also many actors get very frustrated when a director demands a lot of takes (e.g Fincher) as many believe the 20th take isn’t going to be that much better than the 5th and often the director uses the earlier takes which proves that point.
Also it limits Vikander’s employability. She can’t go to fast-paced environments like TV and theater where time and getting it right is off the essence. A lot of older actors seems to move into the direction of TV so I hope she’s going to learn to understand her character quicker so she can hit the right acting spots in less takes.
ETA: even if he likes to have many takes, Vikander still didn’t hit the right spot until the the 13th whereas a good actor will get it straight away and just gives the director different things to work with afterwards (to have more choice what fits best for the character/plot) not because the 1st or 3rd take was bad.
Artemis@ I mean most of the movies she made where indies shoot in a limited period of time. Ex machina was shoot in couple of weeks in Norway. So she doesn’t seems to have too many problems doing what is required.
Film is not comparable to TV. For one, she would have had time to break down the script. TV scripts change constantly and 14+ hour days leaves little time to go over the scripts. You’re lucky if you got a weekend off before starting a new episode so actors have time to break down a script whereas a new episode shoot straight after finishing the last one results in sleepless nights.
And Ex-Machina was shot in 6 weeks apparently which is the average time for a a movie and time enough for different takes in 1 day, 8 weeks would be long for a non-blockbuster film. It’s why actors who work steadily can shoot back to back films (Chastain at one point had 6 films lined up) as they have time to prep for a new film. Busy actors talk about their prep time being 1-2 months long whether that’s physical or emotional prep… Jake Gyllenhaal has worked non-stop since 2012 but had plenty of time to get in shape or lose weight. Film gives you time.
“Hollywood celebrates anybody with a pretty or interesting face who can express themselves on a basic to good level on a camera”
PREACH!!!
She actually started in television, a Swedish soap/drama series. 185 episodes were produced and it ran for 3 years. Not sure if she was part of every episode though. I don’t think actors who only sometimes get a scene right will get work on a regular basis let alone “many people” as you describe it.
@Artemis
Agree. You know this craft inside and out. The actor Jeff Daniels discussed the same points that you have raised in his session on Actors Studio. It was so interesting and it opened my eyes. If I don’t see an actor performing across film, stage and TV. I question their talent.
This is another quote that explains better what he’s trying to say:
“I don’t know. I’m like a yenta or something. I try to find actors that are going to work off of each other and I try to think of chemistry beforehand. I started with Michael and then I had to find someone that I thought would be the storm if he was going to be the ballast, and would be an actor that would challenge him. He’s like Muhammad Ali and I had to find an actor that could push him. I couldn’t bore him with somebody that wasn’t at his level.”
So you found Alicia.
“She’s a thoroughbred, she was like Seabiscuit. Michael gives it in the second take and he’s done, but she goes and she goes and she goes, and she doesn’t tire, and he can’t let her beat him because he’s the champ. So he picks himself up and then she’s not going to lose either, so it becomes this great human competition. And then what happens on set is they begin to catch each other when they fall. It was a beautiful relationship. And the movie witnessed this relationship, you know?”
It definitely doesn’t sound like anything positive, to me it sounds more like “she has stamina…which she needs because she keep failing the takes”.I wouldn’t be happy to hear that if I were her, but I’m not an actress or a director so I have no idea how they view these things.
eta: But if Cianfrance likes to have many takes (as some of you mentioned) wouldn’t he want Fassbender to do the same?
That’s exactly what I have said earlier. She needs to be prepared the next time she goes for a role.
As for Fassbender I have a bone to pick with him and it is not good.
The cover is awful and even the face looks more Megan Markle than AV.
As for the rest, it seems pretty bland interview fare. I’m not reading into it.
But it would not surprise me to see her pregnant with a Fassbaby. They seem to be making a go of it.
Agreed! She looks awful here!
I know she is not a native english speaker, but that phrasing in the headline is weird.
+1.
I still like her. She was incredible in Ex Machina (which she should’ve won the oscar for IMO), and she’s straightforward, ambitious and hardworking. Can’t wait for the comments from crazy Fassbender fans claiming she has a drug addition or w/e.
LOL.
:))
Yeah those are always good for a laugh!
It’s like 3 crazies though. It sucks that they are so vocal which makes it seem like it’s a majority who care about fassbender when most people don’t even know who he is.
Would you still like her if I told you she took the role meant for a black woman in Submergence? Because she did.
Right now I know little about the film and her role, so I’m going to reserve my judgement until I know more. But yes, I would like her a lot less if she knowingly took a whitewashed role that should’ve gone to a Black actress.
Accidental double post!
Angelina Jolie did the same with Mariane pearl and wanted. Thandie newton was originally meant to play mariane but I guess Angelina wanted to stick it to brads ex so she convinced mariane she should play her.
Wanted was based on the graphic novel which starred a black woman and when they announced they were going to shoot the movie they were actively looking for a black actress but then Angelina said she wanted the role and that was it.
Angelina Jolie, just like most white actresses, do not give a fuck. They will always put themselves first morals be damned.
@Rus Angelina Jolie also got criticized as well for playing Marianne.
He’s basically saying that a professional actor was paired with an inexperienced amateur who had the talent but no real skill. But because she’s young and pretty and considered the ingenue, he thought it was charming and exciting instead of tedious.
Now, I like her on screen, I really do. Her face is exquisite and she can, in fact, act. But this director’s statement sounds so condescending.
That mom quote is so weird.
I’ve read Cianfrance’s other interviews and it’s not what he means. He chose her after a long audition and loved to work with her.
Well, he said it though. He needs to choose his words more carefully then. And maybe not call her thoroughbred.
It’s always creepy when women are referred to as thoroughbreds. I look forward to seeing Tomb Raider, I thought that Angelina Jolie fit the role of Lara Croft really well and I actually liked the Tomb Raider movies, did anyone else like them? Maybe it was the novelty (at least for me) of a female hero, a woman who doesn’t need someone to come and save her. 🙂
I prefer the 1st TB over the 2nd one. Her ‘love interest’ was better, Daniel and Jolie were a good match but Gerard Butler was terrible! I was Daniel was in that sequel. That said the films were based off the games which weren’t that good in that era compared to later games. It’s a bit cheesy but that’s also the early 00s for ya. Oh and Jolie was hardly the first female action star who didn’t need any saving but she’s remains most high profile one since that era.
I too want to see the rebooted TB as Vikander does look like a young Croft like in the new games (which are sooo good, the best really!). And her body clearly is crafted to perfection to suit the character and the action. I find her to be bland but I think she will be amazing and it’s a shame it’s another year before it comes out as I think it will help Vikander break out properly like it did with Jolie who also won awards prior to breaking out commercially with an action movie.
I like the first TR but the second one was painful. I’m really excited about the new movie based off the game reboots because they were so good!
There’s nothing exciting in this so far. I’m waiting for the all interview and I really prefer the Tom Hooper quote.
She won her Oscar and faded a bit…that happens to Best Supporting Actress winners a lot for some reason.
Probably due to the high turnover rate in Hollywood and the public. Always looking and being replaced by the next best thing. Plus she won it for Supporting, so in terms of star power at the height of her career it wasn’t even at max if that makes sense, so there might not have been the pull from Directors to cast her in things as there could’ve be had she won Best Leading Actress or something.. (Now they’re are some exceptions, see Viola Davis and Fences.) I wouldn’t be surprised if the 13+ takes thing is also a norm for her on other movies, and in auditions you don’t have that luxury. If she’s really good though she should be fine lulls in work are relatively common.
Yeah.
Looking at BSA Oscar winners through the years, it’s staggering to me how many of their careers went into the toilet post-win. No wonder everyone signs up for franchises.
I guess she was unsure of her career direction: indies? weepies? now action? – I feel she’s trying to be the new Angelina, without the charisma.
She’s going to be in Tomb Raider and wasn’t in at least 1 other movie since she won.
I feel like they should have cut the cianfrance portion. It does not sound like a compliment at all. Like why wouldn’t it be challenging to work with someone who needed that many takes. And the horse comparison is too weird.
I think the cover looks weird but I like the darker hair color.
She can go F herself for taking the role of a black woman in Submergence. Can’t wait until TIFF so we can see what her excuse is for the whitewashing.
The character is described as “half French, half Australian.”
I don’t know anything about this book/movie or this character, but being described as half French, half Australian doesn’t automatically mean white.
In the novel, Danielle Flinders is described as a mixed-raced woman. Her father is Australian and her mother is from Martinique, a country where 90% of the population is black. An excerpt from the novel says this about Danielle; “In her complexion and variety of dress and habits and manners there was something of her mother’s Creole background”
The character is mixed race, Australian, I think, and Martiniquan.
From the book: “She was black to them, carrying the burden of black history…” and “I told you my mother is from Martinique. For Martiniquans the story of the sea is slavery.” Also Annika’s quote above.
I imagine someone like gugu Mbatha-raw for that role but unless you describe your characters as “blackity black black” then apparently it is open for “interpretation”. This only applies to black characters though, whites get to be non-descriptive.
Creole to me implies mixed race Caribbean, so I could see white plus mixed race could be fairly white, but those other quotes seem pretty clear that she is identifiably mixed race.
But, as Rue says, ambiguity only seems to work one way in casting.
Wren I think it does go both ways now. Think of rue from hunger games, Annie, and im not 100% sure but also Spider-Man and a wrinkle in time. And in riverdale (which everyone should watch!) a few Archie comics characters including Veronica have become POC.
Okay, so I should read the book; only going by the amazon description of it.
You know what they are going to say, that they changed the characters from the book, blah, blah, blah. Or that 90 % isn’t, 100% blah, blah, blah.
@ Fiorucci Rue in the Hunger Games was written as black by Collins: “She has dark brown skin and eyes, but other than that’s she’s very like Prim in size and demeanour”, it’s just that a load of racist idiots who read the book conveniently forgot that part and then went bananas at Amandla Stenberg being cast.
I don’t really think it does go both ways, POC actors being cast in “white” intended/written roles is still so rare (compared with the opposite) that it is more the exception that proves the rule.
Gretchen, wow I can’t believe I didn’t know this as I’ve seen it discussed here and never learned that. I think it’s trending to not white wash things and yes reimagine things. I’m sure that Ava duvernay will reimagine something, replacing white characters with POC, again after a wrinkle in time. In the past though, I agree it went one way a lot more, I mean they used to make movies including Chinese characters with accents and some how never had Chinese actors. seems to be going in the right direction now
@Annika Weird I thought roles were given not taken… How many times have you asked when getting a job offer who would have gotten the job if it hadn’t been offered to you and based on that reply said no thank you?
I like her. I hope TR is a success and I hope she has many babies with Fassy.
Same here!
Ok. so to me this just proves how (seemingly) effortlessly talented Fassbender is. Vikander? I may be cynical but she seems to me the skinny blandly exotic (tanned but not black or anything, god forbid) actress everyone is always waiting for in HW and fashion mags. It’s apalling to see that she is having these many roles instead of Lupita Nyongo who is so talented.
Lupita Nyongo for Tomb Rider… 🤔 Yes, that would – almost – make me watch it!
@SlowSnow I couldn’t say it any better and I absolutely agree. Lupita N’yongi is a brilliant actress.
I’d love a black Lara Croft but for all the lovely and cute Lupita is, is too soon to say how talented she is or isn’t. Yes, she was great in 12 years, and she deserved that Oscar and it was such a lucky strike she had: first role in a movie, gets, Oscar, oh! she’s cute and has great charisma and sense of fashion= STARDOM. Which is FINE. It was about time a minority actress had a little bit of the taste of luck many other white, blonde bleu eyed actress have been having for decades. But talented? I’m still waiting for a couple of roles that prove her talent.
Yes @Mannori, but Nyong’o is not getting half the roles Bland McBland over here is having so how can we find out?
I wish she would do an independent movie. If she really wanted to act I am sure she could get a role in some first time directors movie but something tells me she doesn’t want to do that? Why? I am not sure? Even a small part in an ensemble cast? I don’t know what her agents are doing thb.
@Rue I’ve often thought about that. What happened to her?
I was comparing two actresses who had an oscar at a young age and truth is, you probably become more demanding in terms of roles.
Period dramas are a no go for poc (unless they play a slave or it’s a period African drama): for instance, the role that led Vikander to have an Oscar and the one with Fassy were not possible for a woc.
First roles are very rare for poc and second good roles same. I guess N’yongo wants to do quality cinema and nothing’s or almost nothing’s come her way. She was also busy doing a Brodway show I think, Queen of Katwe and is now in Black Panther.
There are other actresses that I can think of but it was just an example of two oscar winners and the ensuing careers.
I think you guys are being a bit over the top. Lupita’s carrer is going well, she’s choosing to be very particular with cinematic project she choose, but at the same time she does prestige role on stage. She’s in one of the biggest blockbuster of the year to come. I don’t why it’s expected for actresses now to have one oscar baity movie every year. Even JLaw doesn’t have that. The competition is strong at the top, which is were Lupita is. Also she has that Disney movie 2 years ago, she probably thought this was going to be an Oscar contender, well it bombed at box office. Sometimes movies only looks good on the papers. My point is that Lupita is going to be fine, plus she’s fashion darling which can always improve her presence in the media.
The director’s comment is a subtle dig to her. “Fassbender exercised a huge deal of tolerance because he’s so good that he need two takes, so he was so patient with this “thoroughbred” who instead needs like 13 takes to get one scene right. He didn’t lose it, hence he’s in love “
That’s what I got too. Subtle shade.
I had an actor friend who worked on soap operas back in the day. You had a rehearsal, blocking, then you shot the scene. There were no 13 takes. If you flubbed your lines consistently they warned you to get it together or you were fired. Film costs money. Hopefully as she matures as an actress it will take her less time to get prepared.
Since Cianfrance’s comment was supposed to be a compliment, maybe he meant that Alicia can still provide a good performance after 13 takes whereas Michael gives his best in the first couple? Maybe he just articulated himself poorly? *shrug*
I know she’s not particularly popular on here for whatever reason, but I think she’s a very good actress and a gorgeous woman.
It was definitely a compliment to Alicia, but also wound up being a little bit of a diss to Michael. I think he was saying that he could have them keep going and Alicia would improve and improve, whereas Fassbender got stuck after two takes and then got discombobulated.
It sounds like Fassbender had an idea of what he wanted to do, would achieve that in two takes, but had a hard time evolving through further takes, which surprises me.
That’s not what he’s saying though. He’s saying Fassbender got it right after one or two takes but Vikander didn’t hit her stride (that is get it right) until take #13.
Doing that many takes for somebody who gets it right almost instantly is frustrating as hell. Especially when the takes are for your co-star who is not on your level. I’ve never met an actor (I used to work in theatre) who loved it when another co-star didn’t ‘get it’ and needed more time. Fassbender fell in love and the director seems to like this so it’s not a big deal in this case.
I get that to from some point. I don’t think he fell in love. They were casually dating remember? I think this is Michael Fassbender’s easy going attitude that smooth thing over for everyone. That’s probably why a lot Hollywood people love to work with him. I am not getting into this fan fiction thing with him because I was a huge fan of his until he disappoint me with this promotion of assassin’ creed. All else I don’t care if they have babies or not.
Alejandro González Iñárritu “You can always tell a great actor because their preparation is always over and above. It shows in their acting and how they promote the film.”
I was unfortunate enough to see the Light Between the Ocean at Cannes.
This actress would be bested served if she stop promoting the relationship.
It was definetely meant to be a compliment. See the other quote that I posted above.
I thought this was meghan markle
Me too!
“I don’t even have children, and it’s the wonder of my world. I’ve always wanted kids.”
Can someone explain this to me?
I really feel for Fassbender, having to have to go through dozens of takes because of her. Acting with someone who needs endless takes to get it right must have been a nightmare for him.
I don’t care for her in big films (Bourne, T.M.F.U. And Burnt were a waste of her talent tbqh)
but I enjoyed her in A Royal Affair, Anna Karenina and Ex Machina. She tends to overact but if she is in the right part she is very interesting to watch. The Danish Girl and TLBO and TMFU were kind of a mess. I know they keep trying to make her the next big thing but I think she is better in smaller films where she can just “be”. In bigger films it seems like she’s struggling to be seen so she acts “broader” than what’s natural, and it works against her in my opinion.
I don’t know about Tomb Raider and Freak Shift sounds like dud.
I hope she finds her niche because she is quite good in the right role.
As for Fassbender…he looks like her Father at this point.
If only half the rumors about their relationship and vices are true…then I say good luck to them both!
She looks less tan. Thick eyeliner suits her. The cover is not great but not bad. Love the other photo she’s adorable there
I wonder if later on, actresses regret sharing their thoughts on maternity. We kind of assume these are normal typical questions, but can this be seen as opening the door to look deeper into her private life? Directors don’t really talk about this stuff, do they?
Basically, I wonder if actresses shouldn’t get better boundaries and deflect more whenever this kind of questions pop up.
“I’ve never been pregnant.”
“I don’t even have children”
…is there something you ain’t telling us, Alicia?
why is the director talking about her needing 13 takes to get a scene right as if that’s something positive? it seems to reflect pretty badly on her? and why is it according to him a recipe for love, when Fassbender gets it done in two takes? like that sounds more like a recipe for annoyance and anger?
I feel like no one understand what he what he was trying to say. Lol.
I like Alicia. I’ve seen a few of her movies and I think she has talent. I understood the directors comment as Michael is an experienced actor that is able to get it right, because he has experience and Alicia is new/ lacks experience but has the motivation to learn and try again until its right. Maybe she’s not at Michael’s level yet, but she will be.
The weird thing is that she has an Oscar and he doesn’t. Acting isn’t really about fairness…
Michael having kids? Michael settling down? That is funny! While I think in a odd way Alicia and Michael go together, I can’t see him settling down. The fact they’ve dated for almost 3 years is crazy. They would have a cute ginger baby. I’m still not crazy over Alicia acting wise. She’s like JLaw- overrated, and becoming overused
She looks, to me, like she’s about to burst into tears. All the Time. That just seems to be her ‘look’.
Also the look trademarked by Princess Charlene.
Hasn’t pills been rumoured for both?
I think its a bit odd to mention the “Ive never been pregnant” line. I mean, was there a rumor at some point?
well there were rumours about her trying to get a Fassbaby so he’ll stay with her, so I took this as her addressing those
Doesn’t it just imply that she’s never miscarried, never had an abortion, never been pregnant period? That’s how I understood it.
Pretentious article featuring pretentious and overrated actress.
Right on point! They could have at least chosen a better cover image, that one looks awful, improvised, in a hurry.
I like her but think she looks like a child. She’s so thin and so childish looking I find myself looking mostly at that in any of her movies.
She always has tied-looking eyes. Her eyes are pointing at different directions in the photos, I don’t why the magazine didn’t notice and fix them lol
btw September issue is the most important issue of the year and they usually got the IT girl on cover. Her ELLE cover and cover-story are lackluster and uninteresing. How did she got the cover?